Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11530 Court No. - 7 Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION DEFECTIVE No. - 22 of 2025 Applicant :- Ajay Pandey And Another Opposite Party :- Smt. Neelam Baranwal And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Udai Pratap Lal Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the review applicant. 2. The review application has been filed seeking review of judgement dated 17.12.2024. 3. The matter was argued by Shri Mohd. Arif Khan, learned Senior Advocate, the present review application has been filed by a different Advocate, when confronted as to whether a different Advocate can file a review application, he has produced a 'no objection certificate' from the earlier counsel. In the light of the said, learned counsel for the review applicant was heard. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that the judgement dated 17.12.2024, failed to consider that the commission was not done despite there being an application to that effect by the petitioner-tenant, he further argues that in the garb of the eviction order, there are apprehension that the landlord may obtain possession of the property over and above what has been decreed. 5. The said review application deserves to be dismissed for the reason that the argument with regard to the commission was specifically raised and was dealt with in paragraph no.4 as well as paragraph no.6 of the said judgement, thus, the said submission merits rejection. As regards the other apprehension expressed by learned counsel for the applicant that the landlord may take possession over and above what has been decreed, also merits rejection as it is well settled that the executing court cannot go behind the decree. Thus on both counts the review application deserves to be rejected. 6. The Court notices that in the judgement dated 17.12.2024, the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has prayed that he may be granted sometime to vacate the premises and after getting indulgence from this Court, a review application has been filed through another Advocate, this stand of the petitioner has to be deprecated and is accordingly deprecated. 7. The review application is dismissed with a cost of Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand only) on the review applicant. The said cost shall be paid by the applicant before the court concerned, failing which the same shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue by the District Magistrate, Sultanpur. The said amount shall be given to the Bar Association, Sultanpur for being utilized for library funds. Order Date :- 24.2.2025 Anupam S/- Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM SINGH PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench